get_availability

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a key privacy behavior (never returning event names, locations, attendees, notes), but it does not clarify whether the operation is read-only, requires special permissions, or has any side effects. The privacy guarantee is valuable but incomplete.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with no waste. The core purpose is front-loaded and the privacy qualifier is stated concisely. Every word contributes to understanding.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The output schema and rich parameter schema cover return values and inputs, but the description omits guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. Given the sibling tools exist, the lack of differentiation makes the definition less complete for selection.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the general 'configured calendars' phrase, so it does not elevate above the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('busy intervals') and adds a privacy qualifier, clearly distinguishing it from find_free_slots (free intervals) and get_calendar_status (status). It explicitly states what is not returned, removing ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when busy intervals are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over find_free_slots or get_calendar_status. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided, leaving some inference to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.